Newdow v. Roberts
Citation | 603 F.3d 1002 |
Decision Date | 07 May 2010 |
Docket Number | No. 09-5126.,09-5126. |
Parties | Michael Arthur NEWDOW, et al., Appellants v. John G. ROBERTS, Jr., Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, et al., Appellees. |
Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia) |
603 F.3d 1002
Michael Arthur NEWDOW, et al., Appellants
v.
John G. ROBERTS, Jr., Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, et al., Appellees.
No. 09-5126.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued December 15, 2009.
Decided May 7, 2010.
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Michael Newdow argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs was Robert V. Ritter.
Lowell V. Sturgill Jr., Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, argued the cause for appellees John G. Roberts, Jr., et al. With him on the brief was Mark B. Stern, Attorney. Brad P. Rosenberg, Attorney, entered an appearance.
Dominic F. Perella argued the cause for appellees Presidential Inaugural Committee and Emmett Beliveau. With him on the brief were Craig A. Hoover, Catherine E. Stetson, E. Desmond Hogan, Robert Bauer, and Andrew Werbrock. Marc Elias entered an appearance.
H. Robert Showers and Kevin T. Snider were on the brief for appellees Joseph Lowery and Richard Warren.
James Matthew Henderson, Sr. was on the brief for amicus curiae American Center for Law & Justice in support of appellees.
Greg Abbott, Attorney General, James C. Ho, Solicitor General, C. Andrew Weber, First Assistant Attorney General, Adam W. Aston, Assistant Solicitor General, David S. Morales, Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation, Candice N. Hance, Assistant Attorney General, Attorney General's Office of the State of Texas, Troy King, Attorney General, Attorney General's Office of the State of Alabama, Daniel S. Sullivan, Attorney General, Attorney General's Office of the State of Alaska, Terry Goddard, Attorney General, Attorney General's Office of the State of Arizona, Dustin McDaniel, Attorney General, Attorney General's Office of the State of Arkansas, Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Attorney General's Office of the State of California, John W. Suthers,
Before: GINSBURG, BROWN, and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges.
Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge BROWN.
Opinion concurring in the judgment filed by Circuit Judge KAVANAUGH.
BROWN, Circuit Judge:
Plaintiffs appeal the dismissal of their constitutional challenge to religious elements of the presidential inaugural ceremony. We affirm the dismissal because plaintiffs' claims regarding the 2009 inaugural ceremony are moot and plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the 2013 and 2017 inaugurations.
Barack Obama was elected President of the United States on November 4, 2008. Prior to and following his election, organizations were formed to assist preparations for the January 20, 2009 ceremony that would mark his inauguration. The then President-elect created a private coordinating group, the Presidential Inaugural Committee ("PIC"), recognized by statute as "the committee appointed by the President-elect to be in charge of the Presidential inaugural ceremony and functions and activities connected with the ceremony." 36 U.S.C. § 501(1). By concurrent resolution, Congress established the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies ("JCCIC") and authorized it to "utilize appropriate equipment and the services of appropriate personnel of departments and agencies of the Federal Government" to "make the necessary arrangements for the inauguration of the President-elect." S. Con. Res. 67, 110th Cong. (2008). The U.S. military services, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2553, jointly formed the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee ("AFIC") to assist the JCCIC and the PIC in "planning and carrying out" security and safety measures, ceremonial duties, and other appropriate activities for the inauguration, id. § 2553(b).
Through the PIC, President Obama invited two private ministers—Revs. Rick Warren and Joseph Lowery—to lead invocation and benediction prayers, respectively, at the inaugural ceremony. President Obama also communicated his wish to John Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States,1 that the Chief Justice administer the presidential oath of office at the ceremony and append the phrase "So help me God" to conclude the oath. See Declaration of Jeffrey P. Minear, Counselor to the Chief Justice, Newdow v. Roberts, Civil Action No. 08-2248 (D.D.C. Jan. 8, 2009), App. for Appellants at 42.
While these preparations were ongoing, plaintiffs were also preparing themselves to attend or view President Obama's inauguration. Plaintiffs—who individually describe themselves as atheist, see, e.g., App. for Appellants at 125, nonreligious and nontheistic, see, e.g., id. at 126, Secularist, see, e.g., id. at 128, or humanist, see, e.g., id. at 136—were hoping President Obama would eschew the prayers and the "So help me God" phrase that have become traditional elements of the inaugural ceremony. However, upon learning these elements were scheduled to be part of the ceremony, plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief in the district court that would bar those elements for the 2009 as well as for
The district court, after a hearing, denied plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion and ordered them to show cause as to why their complaint should not be dismissed for lack of standing and on grounds of issue preclusion related to Newdow's prior challenges, which had been dismissed on standing grounds. See Order, Newdow, Civil Action No. 08-02248 (D.D.C. Jan. 16, 2009). Plaintiffs did not appeal the denial and the inaugural...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Severino v. Biden
...of his official duties’." (quoting Johnson , 4 Wall. at 501 )). Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals in Swan and in Newdow v. Roberts , 603 F.3d 1002 (D.C. Cir. 2010) acknowledged that Franklin , particularly Justice Antonin Scalia's concurrence, called into question whether Nat'l Wildlife re......
-
Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin.
...v. Dickson , 964 F.3d 50, 54 (D.C. Cir. 2020). "The absence of any one of these three elements defeats standing." Newdow v. Roberts , 603 F.3d 1002, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2010). Plaintiffs carry the burden of establishing the elements of standing " ‘with the manner and degree of evidence required......
-
Primesource Bldg. Prods., Inc. v. United States
...defend his executive actions before a court." Franklin , 505 U.S. at 827, 112 S.Ct. 2767 (Scalia, J., concurring); see also Newdow , 603 F.3d at 1013 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (declaratory relief against the President is unavailable); In re Trump , 958 F.3d at 302 ("We have no more power to issue a ......
-
Texas Alliance for Home Care Servs. v. Sebelius
...publication would not transform a financially unsound entity into a viable candidate for the DME Bidding Program. See Newdow v. Roberts, 603 F.3d 1002, 1015 (D.C.Cir.2010) (“Typically, redressability and traceability overlap as two sides of a causation coin.”) (quotation omitted). Where, as......
-
Write on
...Corp., 654 F.3d 11, 74-78 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (Kavanaugh, J., dissenting). [22] Ross Guberman, Point Made 9 (2011). [23] Newdow v. Roberts, 603 F.3d 1002, 1016 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (Kavanaugh, J., concurring). In another opinion, Judge Kavanaugh starts the Discussion section with, “In our view, at......